Am I a libertarian? Is Glenn Beck? Nick Gillespie? Was Ayn Rand or Robert Heinlein? Are you?

I heartily accept the motto, “That government is best which governs least”; and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which also I believe – “That government is best which governs not at all”; and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have. Government is at best but an expedient; but most governments are usually, and all governments are sometimes, inexpedient.
–Henry David Thoreau, Civil Disobedience, 1849

Watching the new FBN show Freedom Watch with the Judge this weekend, I watched Judge Andrew Napolitano ask Reason TV‘s Nick Gillespie if the gulf oil spill was “arguably the fault of the federal government” because BP had originally wanted to drill in 500 feet of water off the Louisiana coastline — a depth for which they had ample prior experience — but the United States Government overrode the State of Louisiana’s permission to BP, forcing the oil company to drill in far deeper waters where risks of a disaster were far higher.

Gillespie, editor of Reason.com and Reason.tv and the editor-in-chief of Reason magazine for eight years, answered:

I think it’s the fault of BP first and foremost because they clearly didn’t follow the best practices for capping wells and having back-up systems. But there’s no question this is a federal issue. It’s taking place in federal waters on a federal seabed. There is a role for the government to play here both in taking blame and figuring out what to do.

Making an argument for government presence, Nick Gillespie is clearly not any sort of an anarchist — individualist, voluntaryist, anarcho-capitalist, mutualist, agorist, or otherwise.

Then again, neither was Ludwig von Mises — whose writings on economics are the gold standard for arguments against state intervention into markets — nor Ayn Rand — whose Atlas Shrugged has without question inspired more people to join libertarian groups than any other novel in history — nor was Robert A. Heinlein — whose science-fiction writings first converted me to libertarianism — and neither is Glenn Beck, whose new novel, The Overton Window, I recently recommended to the Libertarian Futurist Society as a candidate for its Prometheus Award as the year’s best libertarian novel.

So should advocates of what Samuel Edward Konkin III tagged as minarchy — a belief in some minimal rather than zero government — be welcomed into circles, discussions, and organizations of people calling themselves libertarian?

Glenn Beck — whose voice daily reaches three million radio listeners and a couple million more on his Fox News Channel show — has been made to feel unwelcome.

Speaking to Judge Napolitano earlier in that same Freedom Watch, Judge Napolitano had the following exchange with Glenn Beck:

Judge Napolitano: “Okay, Glenn Beck. We know from your TV and radio appearances and your new novel and the conversations we’ve had that you don’t like big government.

Glenn Beck: Right.

Judge Napolitano: Are you a libertarian?

Glenn Beck: Yeah, I think so. I say that with respect to libertarians ’cause I don’t think they want me in their camp.

Glenn Beck isn’t alone in being made unwelcome in the libertarian camp.

A 2008 article on Nolanchart.com titled “Essential Science Fiction and Fantasy for Libertarians” bylined “Dan Clore, libertarian,” flippantly writes off the novel that has produced more libertarian converts than any other, saying, “And finally, the list of possibilities intentionally excludes Ayn Rand’s egregious enormity Atlas Shrugged.”

Jeff Riggenbach, whose Wikipedia stub describes him as “an American libertarian journalist, author, editor, broadcaster, and educator” — and who in 1983 praised my novel The Rainbow Cadenza in the San Jose Mercury News as “that rare thing, a genuinely intellectual thriller” — writes in his June 2, 2010 Mises Daily article “Was Robert A. Heinlein a Libertarian?“:

The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress is unquestionably a libertarian novel. It is unquestionably one of the three or four most influential libertarian novels of the last century. But whether its author, Robert A. Heinlein, can plausibly be described as a libertarian in his personal political views remains a troubled question.

Now let’s get to me. Before I’d ever met anyone else who called himself a libertarian I’d started a campus libertarian group on my college campus. I was regularly writing for libertarian newsletters and magazines within a year after that. I organized meetings of a libertarian supper club with Murray Rothbard as its first speaker in 1974, and organized the first conferences on counter-economics — with Samuel Edward Konkin III and Robert LeFevre as featured speakers — in 1974 and 1975. I reviewed Murray Rothbard’s book, For A New Liberty, in Murray Rothbard’s own journal, The Libertarian Forum. I’ve written two novels that have received gold coins as awards from the Libertarian Futurist Society and a third novel that was a finalist. I’m also known for having written one of the most popular books defending the right to keep and bear arms — a position that when I took to the Op-Ed page of the Los Angeles Times to present quite possibly lost me TV writing work that might have kept my financial-hardship-strained marriage from busting up. I’ve gotten other awards and accolades from libertarian organizations, libertarian celebrities, and libertarian publications.

Yet when on June 16th I praised Glenn Beck’s novel for its libertarian content, a Facebook friend named Chris Tolliver wrote on my Facebook wall, “I have lost all respect for you, J Neil. Agorist, you are not. Statist, you are. Glenn Beck and libertarian do not go together. He’s not a libertarian.”

Then this past Friday when Brad Spangler, director of the anarchist Center for a Stateless Society, thanked his Facebook friends for voting him a high ranking in a website poll asking for guest suggestions for Freedom Watch with the Judge, I discovered that my name wasn’t even on the list. Upon being told of this Brad Spangler — a true gentleman — immediately added my name to the list and posted a Facebook message asking his supporters to vote for me as well, but I’d already taken the point that if you want to be popular among libertarians — when it comes time to decide who they want speaking for them — you’d better stick to their agenda as closely as any corporate flack or White House press secretary.

A lifetime of devotion to liberty isn’t even close to being enough for many libertarians to think of you as being a member of their little clique.

And I do mean little.

If being a lifetime worker for liberty isn’t enough for some people, evolving towards liberty from a mainstream state-approving belief system is likely to have you looked at the way a life-saving transplanted organ is regarded by blindly hostile white corpuscles — with results just as fatal to the body.

It just doesn’t take much for libertarians to treat you like a Jew trying to join the Episcopalian-run country club.

It might be enough that you express a belief in God, while most radical libertarians are hostile to religion.

Being a believer in limited rather than zero government is another reason for the blackball to be dropped into the bowl.

Think the United States is historically an overall force for good in the world, or have good things to say about the Founding Fathers? Get ready for many libertarians to call you a Neocon, no matter how many wars you’ve demonstrated against.

And God forbid that you have anything good to say about Israel, Mormons, Jesus Christ, or Country Music.

When the hell did the libertarian movement become more exclusive than the Bohemian Grove?

Devotees of liberty are facing the strongest push towards totalitarian global statism I’ve seen in my lifetime. The libertarian movement is too small, too fragile, too marginalized already for anyone as potentially decisive to the cause of liberty as Glenn Beck, Ayn Rand, Robert Heinlein — and yes, me, especially now when I’m working my ass off to produce a movie based on my most popular libertarian-themed novel, Alongside Night — to be treated with adolescent dismissal.

Wise up. Robust libertarian movements have historically been rerouted back onto the Road to Serfdom by far less.

Winner of the Special Jury Prize for Libertarian Ideals from the 2011 Anthem Film Festival! My comic thriller Lady Magdalene’s — a movie I wrote, produced, directed, and acted in it — is now available free on the web linked from the official movie website. If you like the way I think, I think you’ll like this movie. Check it out!

As someone who’s described myself as a libertarian, and who writes on multiple libertarian blogs, I haven’t been victim to the criticism you have. Of course, I’m a blogger who also does some columns and the occasional news story, not an award winning novelist. Why would I be. However, I have seen it. Far to many libertarians expect the perfect rather than the “good enough for now”, and let any deviation from their ideology get in the way.

Very nicely said. I only hope more within the libertarian circles take it to heart.

This is something that I’ve been puzzling over for the last few weeks – the seemingly innumerable “holy wars” between certain outspoken individuals in various libertarian and Objectivist camps – and I think I’ve got it. Of course, I may not, and please feel free to treat this idea as an intellectual pinata.

The “treat you like a Jew trying to join the Episcopalian-run country club” analogy may be closer to the mark than intended. I saw pretty much the same behavior, expressions, and mannerisms in these people as I did in certain folks among the fundamentalist religious people I was raised by and with. Now, depending on the groups involved these people may or may not be representative of the whole, but they tend to be the loudest in the bunch so the distinction is easily lost if you’re not careful. Anyhow, what these people who spew constant hate have in common is that they are, essentially, losers. Despite whatever accomplishments they have achieved, deep down they are not proud of their lives. Since they have little or no self-esteem, they substitute tribalism and their degree of adherence to whatever orthodoxy they’ve chosen becomes the source of meaning in their lives. They can’t find joy in themselves, so they seek satisfaction in tearing down others. For some reason, they seem to get the most satisfaction in nit-picking those closest to their beliefs for relatively minor infractions.

On the one hand, these people really are obnoxious jerks, but on the other I have to admit they helped motivate me to re-examine my beliefs and (unintentionally) sent me down the path that led me towards individualism, libertarianism and agnosticism.

Anyhow, this hypothesis is based on my own personal interactions and I may be completely full of excrement. That being said, the resemblance in the behaviors that I’ve observed is somewhere between “really close” and “perfect.” Whack away at it.

Sometimes I don’t think libertarians want to succeed. They would rather have their underground internet communities in which they all “prove” to each other that one’s libertarian ideology is more pure than the next guy’s.

Good article and many should take it to heart. Beck may not be perfect, but he has done some good stuff for the liberty movement recently. Embrace it, don’t try and push it away.

WIth due respect to Beck who is opening more eyes to libertarianism than anyone else in our time, I expect that when the rubber meets the road he will fail the movement and promote a pro-war statist at the opportune time to do so. Glenn Beck isn’t interested in promoting liberty so much as he’s interested in promoting war, and he’s shown it time and again.

The problem with Beck is that he doesn’t seem to understand that libertarianism isn’t about American’s but about human individuals. Collateral damage is murder. I am sorry, but I will not open my arms to people who can rationalize murder as acceptable under any circumstances.

So fine, he is turning people on to Hayek. That’s great. My concern is that he also turns people on to accepting murder, and when it comes time for these roads to fork when he’s faced with endorsing a candidate for president, I have no confusion on which leg of road he’s going to take. And I, nor ANY self respecting, and principle-observing libertarian will or should follow him there.

Note: I wish I could edit that statement to say that Beck is the media member opening more eyes to libertarianism in our time (with due respect to Stossel who’s decades of effort have not gone unnoticed). It is Ron Paul who is “opening more eyes to libertarianism than anyone else in our time.”

The likelihood that one will agree with any person who describes themselves generally with the same label of “libertarian” is nil. In the extreme, the libertarian ideal is a world where everyone runs for office but nobody compromises his principles to vote for another candidate, and where everyone has their own blog but nobody else reads it. The righteous resistance to infringement on our individual rights is what makes us libertarians in the first place, but I agree that it may be time to take a step back from the edge and allow a bit of compromise. We have to be aware of the perfect solution fallacy and not fall victim to it.

“So should advocates of what Samuel Edward Konkin III tagged as minarchy — a belief in some minimal rather than zero government — be welcomed into circles, discussions, and organizations of people calling themselves libertarian?”

Uh, did I miss the announcement that you had to be an anarchist to be a libertarian???

For me, libertarianism has ALWAYS included both minarchists and anarchists. Did that change somehow??

Thank you, Mr. Schulman. I am very libertarian and a regular viewer of Glenn Beck. I hope Glenn recognizes you and your submission of his book for that award.

By many libertarians’ standards, I am a neocon. Not because now I believe in a non-interventionist foreign policy, or that I advocate legalization of all recreational drugs, but because I was for McCain in 2008. See I am just a neocon shill pretending to be a libertarian, because in 2008 I would have called Ron Paul nuts.

Why can’t elitist libertarians accept honest converts, and stop paying attention to 2008 clips of Glenn Beck. Just like I wised up to my old neo-con ways, Glenn did too.

They don’t seem to notice Glenn’s hour long special with Cato on cutting the defense budget and moving toward a more modest foreign policy.

By their logic, John Stossel is still a leftist, government loving liberal, all because of his previous reporting in his early days.

I honestly think it’s mostly the Alex Jones zombies who are pissed off at Glenn’s interview of Deb Medina. Once again, they clearly didn’t notice that Glenn supported her views of states’ rights, and that he doesn’t want 9/11 truthers to shut up, he just doesn’t agree with their views and thinks that makes Medina a bit sketchy. I mean, Penn Jillette is more libertarian than Glenn and Penn doesn’t believe in any of that 9/11 conspiracy crazyness.
Hell, they don’t even notice that Ron Paul himself is not a 9/11 truther. Tucker Carlson made a good point that Ron Paul, as a person, does not want to be a leader type person, that he doesn’t want to tell people what to think. That’s why he doesn’t tell the 9/11 truth nuts to take a hike. That’s a good thing. I would never tell anybody who supports me to take a hike (unless they were a neo-Nazi), no matter how much I disagree with them.

Thank you, Mr. Schulman. I am very libertarian and a regular viewer of Glenn Beck. I hope Glenn recognizes you and your submission of his book for that award.

Alex,

You’re more than welcome.

Let me take this opportunity to announce that my article “Glenn Beck’s Libertarian Thriller The Overton Window has been accepted by the Libertarian Futurist Society’s editor of its official journal Prometheus, Anders Monsen, for publication in one of the next two issues, depending on space availability.

Alex- maybe to SOME libertarians you are a neocon. Not sure who these ‘elitist libertarians’ you speak of, but I think all honest libertarians welcome converts. Most libertarians didn’t start as libertarians, but moved toward it. Heck, Lew Rockwell seems to be doing a good job of converting Naomi Wolf to our cause. But there you’re dealing with someone who was pretty close and moving closer on their own.

Glenn Beck is closer to libertarianism then some of the non-libertarian pundits out there. Maybe he’ll come around. I would like to see him apologize for some of the rude things he said in the past about Ron Paul and other libertarians first tho.

Neal Boortz I kind of like, but his foreign policy views aren’t very libertarian.

Bill Maher is an example of someone who claims to be libertarian, but what he expresses doesn’t strike me as very libertarian. He would be a better example of what Jeff B speaks of someone perverting the meaning.

Me, I’m a fairly “big tent” libertarian. I accept minarchists, anarcho-capitalists, Objectivists, classical liberals, agorists and the like as “libertarians”, even most “constitutionalists”. I do have an issue with some of the so-called “beltway libertarians”. I do have an issue with some associated with the “kochtopus”, especially when they try to make statements and push views that aren’t very libertarian, then try to attach those I feel are libertarians (those associated with Liberty mag, FEE, Mises Institute, Ron Paul, etc)

Not to wade into any debate about libertarianism or Glenn Beck, but I just want to emphasize that publication of a review in Prometheus in no way implies endorsement of the bylined writer’s views, nor the subject of the review. This has always been stated in the newsletter.

Not to wade into any debate about libertarianism or Glenn Beck, but I just want to emphasize that publication of a review in Prometheus in no way implies endorsement of the bylined writer’s views, nor the subject of the review. This has always been stated in the newsletter.

Anders Monsen
editor, Prometheus

I’m sorry Anders. I didn’t realize that having the Prometheus Award once again associated with a libertarian novel would cause you such grief.